Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open cuisine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. --Coredesat 00:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Open cuisine

Open cuisine (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Topic is non-notable, a Google search brings up blogs with tags for the authors promotion for the topic. Second author is suspect as has only worked on this article as well and has added a SPAM link and only added information on Molecular Gastronomy which is an entirely different topic. The article also seems to be written in a complete POV promotional view. Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 13:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment It was my belief that they had posted about a professional program which many chefs use that is a commercially produced product which they had not given proper citation for. Looking back at it now though I realize it is just a generic way of saying that one can use the "recipe generator" function of any computerized recipe program.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 16:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to receive an explanation about the given status. We are new to Wikipedia and HAVE read the policies about posting. The article was published with no economical reasons. The fact is that Open cuisine is a natural answer to what recipes have made to the process of cooking. It is just an invention of the whole new approach, that is relevant for worldwide cooking. If we are first to write about it, I don't know what is wrong about it. In the flood of various spurious articles (like Californian cuisine), we think this topic is highly relevant to cuisine and cooking. Foodizmo 18:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - Californian cuisine is an established cuisine however, which can be studied as there has been numerous books, articles and even restaurants established based upon the cuisine. Wikipedia does not support creation of articles based upon original research see WP:No original research and there is also a criteria for notable topics see WP:Notable. This is not a personal attack on your theories, they are just not "as-of-yet" encyclopedic. I also have to be honest, I follow food tends very closely, especially with much of the newish Molecular gastronomy (which the article cites as being "open cuisines" foundation) items appearing through Ferran Adria, Grant Achatz, Homaro Cantu, Wylie Dufresne etc. and I have never heard of "Open cuisine" mentioned by them or at any conference including StarChefs where much new information usually is discussed. --Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 16:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I see. Obviously we don't match the Wiki criteria by current standards. So the article should be removed, unless we provide stronger basis of it, right? We sure don't want to negotiate the publishing of this article - will follow the rules. And answer to Christopher Allen Tanner: Recipe generator was meant in completely different way (and that topic is inappropriate for Wikipedia, I admit). If interested, drop a PM. Foodizmo —Preceding comment was added at 18:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete as original research. Dr.frog 13:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.